First off, we should be very thankful that there is one attorney who has the integrity and courage to call out the judiciary for its systemic corruption, and that one attorney is Sara Naheedy! I have been involved in fighting judicial corruption in the American courts for a long time: in my personal experiences with it, my public writings against it, and various interviews that I have done about it, but I have never seen an attorney publicly call out judicial corruption as attorney Sara Naheedy has done. She is definitely quite special and one of a kind. She has exhibited unparalleled courage in stepping up to the plate.
Corruption is a rampant problem in all American courts—none are immune. Sara and her co-author, Tom Scott, write about it in their wonderful book, Stack The Legal Odds In Your Favor, which is a one-of-a-kind book and a must-read for all who are interested in learning about just how corrupt the system is and, more importantly, how people can protect themselves before being attacked by it. I've also written about the sorry state of affairs of and the corruption in the judiciary in my book, Motion for Justice: I Rest My Case.
Indeed, the American courts are extremely corrupt to the point, in my opinion, that they are essentially a criminal enterprise that collects money in the form of filing fees and then flexes its abusive power muscles by systematically ruling in favor of corporations and government agencies and influential people over the regular peoples' interests to fairness and justice. Bribery and malfeasance are certainly serious problems in the American courts.
Judicial integrity starts at the top with the chief justice of the United States, who currently happens to be John Roberts, a minion from Indiana. Not long ago, Roberts issued a 2019 Year-End Report on the Federal Judiciary. Roberts stated, “I ask my judicial colleagues to continue their efforts to promote public confidence in the judiciary, both through their rulings and through civic outreach,” and, “We should reflect on our duty to judge without fear or favor, deciding each matter with humility, integrity, and dispatch.” Yet most people in the country who have had dealings in the federal judiciary have serious questions about the “integrity” of the federal judges since most of the rulings go in favor of rich corporations and government agencies and consequently the peoples’ cases never make it to a trial.
The Roberts “report” didn’t indicate the number of cases that the federal judges are dismissing without a trial. The number is so outrageous that the Administration Office of the U.S. Courts doesn’t want the people to know. When I asked the Office to tell me how many cases were dismissed without a trial, they responded that they didn’t keep track of that information. That is essentially unbelievable in this day and age of technology since all federal courts operate under electronically supported database systems. The vast majority of the people in our country are not seeing their “day in court” as most of the cases are being dismissed while Roberts sits back and does nothing about it.
When I served as executive director of the Posner Center of Justice for Pro Se’s, I reviewed many cases and found a myriad of injustices that were a direct result of federal judges’ actions—and occurring at a highly alarming rate. When Judge Richard A. Posner retired from the federal judiciary after thirty-eight years of distinguished service, he publicly warned the country as to the injustices that were taking place by the judges on the Seventh Circuit against the people.
Roberts doesn’t want the public to know how much of a “secret society” the federal judiciary is and how it really operates. The federal judiciary essentially uses the public as a “cash cow” by collecting hefty filing fees for cases that are essentially predetermined to be dismissed without a trial, notwithstanding the Seventh Amendment right to a jury trial. Those filing fees exceed $500 in some courts.
The last thing that Roberts should be doing is thumping his chest and professing the phrase “equal justice under the law”. If there actually was “equal justice under the law,” federal judges wouldn’t be so determined to issue overwhelmingly favorable rulings to corporations and government agencies and the majority of the peoples’ cases would make it to a trial, but federal judges don’t allow that to happen, for the most part. Roberts knows it. Several recent articles support this premise. See, for example, articles in The Atlantic, The Washington Post, and this blog. So, the next time Roberts decides to issue a public “report”, he should at least be honest about it and not mislead the people, which is exactly what he did.